Since 1991, I have been visiting schools - mostly middle grades schools -that have been implementing alternatives to tracking and remediation,sometimes including math. These schools tell me about a number ofstrategies that have worked for them to keep all kids learning meaningfulcontent in heterogeneous classrooms that convey that everyone can learn thiscontent. Among the essential ingredients for this approach to work are:(1) a strong belief system in the school that all kids deserve access to andwill learn meaningful content - in the case of math, as defined by thestandards; (2) a wide variety of ways that allow for all kids toparticipate and keep up in that meaningful curriculum. Sometimes thatinvolves skill-focused grouping for extra instruction and practice, but -and this is the important part - that grouping is not *instead of* the corecurriculum class, but *in adddition to* that class. These "extra helpopportunities" take the form of before-, after-, and lunchtime sessions;pre-teaching (for students to get a "jump start" on a new unit); doubleperiods in math; saturating classes with extra helpers, including olderstudents, community volunteers; co-teaching of "regular" and "special"teachers, including Chapter 1; substituting extra math for an elective;Saturday and/or summer work. (3) standards-based, often thematic,curriculum and assessments, including classroom rubrics, to go with it. Inmy observations, when tracking goes unchallenged, too many students are leftwith, not just a remedial curriculum but with a curriculum that avoidsteaching for understanding. This is not to say that challenging tracking iseasy - all the above approaches require adjustments for the adults in thebuilding. Anne Wheelock